Page 15 of 16
PE15.1-4 | Fluids and Electrolytes — Assignment
CLINICAL SCENARIO
You will write a structured clinical case report documenting the comprehensive fluid and electrolyte management of a paediatric patient with dehydration and electrolyte disturbance. This task develops your ability to apply the Holliday-Segar formula, classify dehydration using IMNCI criteria, formulate an evidence-based rehydration plan, interpret electrolyte abnormalities, and demonstrate knowledge of emergency vascular access. These are essential competencies for managing common and potentially life-threatening presentations in Indian paediatric practice.
Instructions
- Construct a realistic clinical scenario for a child aged 6 months to 8 years presenting with acute diarrhoea and/or vomiting. Include weight, age, vital signs, and clinical findings sufficient to apply IMNCI dehydration classification. You may use a real patient you have clerked (anonymised) or construct a composite scenario.
- Classify the degree of dehydration using IMNCI criteria (no dehydration / some / severe), explicitly listing the signs that support your classification.
- Calculate the maintenance fluid requirement using the Holliday-Segar formula (100/50/20 mL/kg/day), showing your working step by step. Also state the hourly equivalent using the 4-2-1 rule.
- Calculate the deficit volume based on the assessed percentage dehydration. State the total 24-hour fluid requirement (maintenance + deficit) and specify how you would distribute the fluids over 24 hours (first 8 hours vs remaining 16 hours if applicable).
- Interpret any electrolyte abnormalities present (real or hypothetical for the scenario). If sodium or potassium is abnormal, describe the management, including the safe correction rate for hyponatraemia (≤10–12 mmol/L/24 h to avoid ODS) or the safe IV potassium infusion rate (maximum 0.5 mmol/kg/hr).
- Specify the type of ORS you would prescribe (reduced-osmolarity ORS, osmolarity 245 mOsm/L) if the child can receive oral/NG fluids, and the appropriate plan (Plan A, B, or C).
- Describe the steps you would take to insert a peripheral IV cannula in this child. If peripheral access fails after two attempts, explain the indication for and technique of IO access.
- Write a brief summary reflecting on what you learned from this case and any errors or difficulties encountered.
Length: 1000–1400 words (excluding tables and calculations)
What to Submit
1. Case Presentation
Guidance: Describe age, weight, duration of illness, number of episodes of vomiting/diarrhoea, clinical findings on examination (general appearance, eyes, fontanelle if infant, skin turgor, capillary refill, HR, BP, RR). Include any laboratory results available (serum Na, K, urea, HCO3).
2. Dehydration Classification (IMNCI)
Guidance: Explicitly list the IMNCI signs you assessed and which category (no / some / severe) you assign. State which IMNCI Plan (A/B/C) is indicated and why.
3. Fluid Calculations
Guidance: Show step-by-step Holliday-Segar calculation for this child's weight. State daily maintenance and hourly rate (4-2-1). Calculate deficit volume (% dehydration × 10 mL/kg × weight). State total 24-h requirement and distribution schedule.
4. Electrolyte Interpretation and Management
Guidance: Discuss any sodium or potassium abnormality in your scenario. For hyponatraemia: state how much the Na needs to rise, at what maximum rate (≤10–12 mmol/L/24 h), and what fluid is appropriate. For hyperkalaemia: describe the management sequence (calcium gluconate → insulin+dextrose → bicarbonate). Justify your choices.
5. ORS and Oral Rehydration
Guidance: Specify the ORS formulation (reduced-osmolarity 245 mOsm/L). State the amount to give per loose stool (Plan A) or total ORS for Plan B (75 mL/kg over 4 h). Discuss when ORS is appropriate vs when IV is mandatory.
6. Vascular Access Procedure
Guidance: Describe the steps of peripheral IV cannula insertion in this child (site selection, preparation, technique, confirmation of placement). If applicable, describe the indication and technique for IO insertion (site, confirmation, flush). Reflect on any challenges specific to paediatric patients.
7. Reflection and Learning Points
Guidance: What aspects of paediatric fluid management did you find most challenging? What would you do differently? Which PE known-traps (Holliday-Segar figures, ORS osmolarity, Na correction rate, K infusion limit) did you have to look up or verify?
Grading Rubric — Fluids and Electrolytes Case Write-Up Rubric
| Criterion | Points | Full-marks descriptor |
|---|---|---|
| Dehydration classification: correctly applies IMNCI criteria, accurately lists signs, and assigns the correct Plan (A/B/C) with justification | 20 pts | All IMNCI signs listed correctly; classification and Plan are accurate and explicitly justified with reference to IMNCI criteria |
| Fluid calculations: Holliday-Segar maintenance (100/50/20 mL/kg/day) and deficit volume calculated correctly with working shown; distribution schedule stated | 25 pts | Maintenance calculation is correct with all steps shown; deficit calculation is correct; distribution schedule (first 8 h / remaining 16 h) is accurate and logical |
| Electrolyte management: correct interpretation of Na/K abnormality and safe management (correction rate ≤10–12 mmol/L/24 h for hyponatraemia; sequence for hyperkalaemia; K max 0.5 mmol/kg/hr) | 20 pts | Electrolyte abnormality correctly identified and interpreted; management plan is accurate including the rate/dose limits; contraindications or dangers addressed |
| ORS and vascular access: correct ORS (reduced-osmolarity 245 mOsm/L) specified; IV cannula insertion steps described accurately; IO access indication and technique described when relevant | 20 pts | Reduced-osmolarity ORS (245 mOsm/L) named and amount specified correctly; IV cannula insertion steps described in full; IO indication (after 2 failed IV attempts) and proximal tibial technique described |
| Reflection quality: demonstrates genuine self-assessment, identifies specific learning gaps, and shows awareness of real clinical challenges in paediatric IV/fluid management | 15 pts | Reflection is specific and insightful: identifies named factual areas revisited, describes a concrete clinical challenge, articulates what would be done differently |
PEER REVIEW
Read your peer's case write-up carefully. Using the rubric, score each of the five criteria and provide 2–3 sentences of specific feedback per criterion. For the fluid calculations, check the arithmetic yourself using the Holliday-Segar formula. For the electrolyte section, verify the correction rate and sequence against the known-traps checklist. Note any factual errors (e.g. incorrect ORS osmolarity, wrong correction rate) as separate comments. End your review with one overall strength and one specific suggestion for improvement.